1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to 0 computer based testing systems. More specifically, the invention relates to systems and methods for measuring, analyzing and training improvements in mental ability.
2. Description of the Related Art
Scientists and psychologists have long sought an objective measure of general mental ability that is independent of cultural bias (acculturation). Most pen and pencil PSYCHOMETRIC (xe2x80x9cIQxe2x80x9d) tests (e.g., Stanford Binet and Wechsler) are biased to the degree that their questions favor prior learning of; procedural skills (e.g., use of math tables enabling faster solutions), strategies (e.g.,. how to solve certain problems), and language (e.g., alphabet, vocabulary, colloquialisms).
Although IQ tests purport to measure native mental aptitude, or ability, per se, a growing percentage of educational and cognitive psychologists have argued that, xe2x80x9cindividual differences in tested IQ are attributable to differences in the opportunities afforded by the environment for acquiring the specific skills that are called for by the standardized tests of intelligencexe2x80x9d.
In an attempt to identify a common factor that accounts for individual variations across a broad range of mental tests, scientists have constructed the term xe2x80x98gxe2x80x99. The degree to which any test reflects native intelligence, or mental processing skills, versus acculturated learning, is its g-factor, or g-correlation.
A xe2x80x98g-factorxe2x80x99 score results from a factor analysis of a wide range of mental ability tests, and relates to those components of the tests that are most highly correlated in their predictability of test results. However, although g is often used as a synonym for IQ, in fact, it is not a measure of any kind of knowledge or mental skill. That is, g is not related to cognitive content. g reflects cognitive capacity, that is, information processing capacities (speed, capacity and efficiency). The knowledge and skill content of performance on mental ability tests is merely an expression of g which reflects the overall capacity of information processes by which knowledge and skills can be learned and effectively applied, such as, in an IQ test.
Over the past 20-30 years Cognitive Science has developed the theory that cognitive ability, i.e., g, is based on the brain""s (information processing) speed. Studies have revealed high correlations between highly g-loaded mental tests (e.g, Wonderlic, Ravens and WAIS), and brain-speed, as measured via neural conduction velocity (optic-nerve transmission speed), and chronometric (reaction speed) cognitive tests, for instance.
Underlying g, or basic intelligence, are elementary cognitive processes (ECPs) involved in every stage of cognition from perception to decision-making. More specifically, ECPs are comprised of the following components: the perceptual registration (xe2x80x9capprehensionxe2x80x9d) of the stimuli (bits of information); the identification (xe2x80x9cdiscriminationxe2x80x9d) of the information; the xe2x80x9cselectionxe2x80x9d and xe2x80x9cencodingxe2x80x9d of the information, and the appropriate reaction, be it: physical (sensory-motor), i.e., xe2x80x9csimplexe2x80x9d reaction-time (RT), or; cognitive, ie, xe2x80x9cchoicexe2x80x9d, xe2x80x9cdiscriminationxe2x80x9d and xe2x80x9cdecisionxe2x80x9d RTs. Cognitive reactions involve the additional ECPs of; xe2x80x9crehearsalxe2x80x9d and further xe2x80x9cencodingxe2x80x9d of appropriately selected information while, short and long term memory files are simultaneously accessed, followed by the xe2x80x9ctransformationxe2x80x9d and xe2x80x9cmanipulationxe2x80x9d of retrieved information for the purposes of making the appropriate choice, discrimination or decision response. Any test that challenges and quantifies elementary cognitive processes is referred to as an elementary cognitive task (ECT).
A simple reaction-time (RT) test involves a single (sensory-motor) response when a certain event happens, such as, pressing a button when a light goes on. A choice RT test involves two or more possible choice responses. For example, xe2x80x9cIf a red light flashes on the screen, press the R key, and if a green light presents itself, press the G key.xe2x80x9d A discrimination RT test generally involves the use of short term memory to render a yes/no response. As an example, a string of letters is presented for quick review, quickly followed by a second set of letters, with the requirement that the subject determines whether any letter in the second group was in the first group and respond as quickly as possible.
And, a decision RT test requires the access of short term memory and/or long term memory (LTM) in order to render the correct xe2x80x9csplit-secondxe2x80x9d decision. For example, the stimlus may pair a word with a picture on the computer. The Rule might be, xe2x80x9cIf the word and picture are the same, press the right arrow key, otherwise press the left.xe2x80x9d
Although xe2x80x9csimplexe2x80x9d RTs show a relatively low correlation to IQ, choice (and especially) discrimination and decision RTs demonstrate a relatively high (over 0.50) correlation. In addition, the higher the number of alternative choices, or possible responses, the higher the test""s g-factor. A primary indicator of the g-value of an ECT is the length of time required for a correct response. For instance, simple RTs are typically 275 milliseconds (ms). However, choice RT increases as a log function (to the base 2) of the number of choices (Hick""s Law). Typically a four choice test might require 350 to 400 ms. In a decision speed test with a random rule-changing cue, response times typically exceed 1000 ms. RT times around 1000 ms indicate the full engagement of xe2x80x9cWorking memoryxe2x80x9d and are considered to be highly g-loaded. However, RTs much over 1000 ms typically reflect non-elementary (meta) cognitive processes, such as, xe2x80x9cthinkingxe2x80x9d (computations based on learned strategies or procedures, generalizations, etc.).
The functional processing-system serving the elementary cognitive processes is what Cognitive Science terms xe2x80x9cWorking memoryxe2x80x9d. It is likened to a computer""s central processor. The faster the processor, the smarter the computer and brain.
The ideal mental ability test, therefore, would quantify as many ECPs as possible, that is from perception and simple RT, to choice and decision RT.
In response to the need to eliminate cultural bias from the quantification of g a number of electronic and chronometric methodologies have been employed revealing various physiological signatures (electrical, chemical and metabolic) and information-processing capacities of the brain showing high correlations with g.
Various test measurements revealing significant correlations with g include: cognitive chronometric (RT) tests including xe2x80x9cChoice RTxe2x80x9d and xe2x80x9cDiscrimination (decision) RTxe2x80x9d; xe2x80x9cneural conduction velocityxe2x80x9d; brain (wave) evoked potentials; brain hemisphere coherence (integration, or synchronicity); total synchronous (alpha and theta) brain wave xe2x80x9cenergy-under-the-curvexe2x80x9d; and others. However, none have shown the practicality, ease of administration and fundamental potential as the chronometric cognitive (RT) tests.
Over 130 years ago Sir Francis Galton advanced the notion that xe2x80x9creaction speedxe2x80x9d reflected general intelligence. One-hundred years ago American psychologist J. Allen Gilbert at Yale University was first to demonstrate a relationship between RT and intelligence. RT IQ correlation studies continued over the years. The modern era of choice RT chronometric intelligence tests started around 1952 when W. G. Hicks discovered that, multiple xe2x80x9cchoicexe2x80x9d reaction times increase as a linear function of the increase in the amount of information presented to the subject, when information is measured in binary bits, that is, the logarithm (to the base 2) of the number of choices. This relationship has become known as Hick""s Law.
In 1964, E. Roth, using choice RT tests, found that individual differences in the slope of RT as a function of bits (i.e., the rate of information processing), are correlated with IQ. This was one of the first demonstrations of a relationship between (cognitive) response speed and intelligence as predicted by the general theory that, IQ tests measure, among other things, the degree of learning that results from one""s information processing capacity.
More recently, Steinburg, Nettlebeck and Jensen, working independently, have measured a number of assumed different ECPs (e.g., inspection time and dual discrimination RT) discovering that, the greater the number of different ECP components measured, the higher their collective g-correlation.
To date most, if not all, chronometric research has been experimental rather than application oriented. In order to render the field viable as a mass population measurement system, the following are (minimally) needed: (1) a comprehensive battery of ECTs that quantify most, if not all, of the known elementary cognitive processes, components and mechanisms of cognition, including; perceptual awareness, brain processing speed, cognitive processing (choice and decision) speeds, working memory capacity, and speed of long term memory (LTM) access (from episodic, semantic and/or symbolic divisions of LTM), and the subsequent speed and efficiency of working memory""s organization of relevant data to make a correct choice or decision; (2) a comprehensive battery of ECTs that are truly interactive, whereby test complexity (difficulty) is adjusted on-line, depending upon the speed, accuracy and consistency (efficiency) of the user""s responses, in order that the task can optimally challenge, or xe2x80x9cloadxe2x80x9d, user""s ECP (or, working memory) capacity to its maximum potential, and; (3) an automated computer program (or otherwise electronic device) incorporating such a battery of ECTs that can easily be run on almost any contemporary computer hardware.
It should also be noted that the refined quantification of cognitive components that make up a more generalized mental ability might be helpful in aiding educators and employers to better qualify and place individuals, as well as address their individual cognitive strengths and weaknesses.
In the final analysis there appears to be a real and timely need for a practical yet fair way to quantify intelligence, or g, and its sub-components, whose test results reflect those cognitive processing capabilites underlying xe2x80x9cintelligencexe2x80x9d, and which are not influenced by one""s cultural advantages or disadvantages, or even by one""s genetic history which may have predisposed the nature of one""s xe2x80x98intelligencexe2x80x99 to be different than the qualities of intelligence deemed to be most appropriate for measurement by tests developed some 25 to 50 years ago.
The need in the art is addressed by the present invention, which, in a most general sense, provides an interactive automatic system and technique for measuring and analyzing mental ability. In the illustrative embodiment, the invention is implemented on a computer which automatically presents a variety of visual and auditory stimuli. The system measures reactions (or lack of) to the stimuli, and provides immediate on-line feedback of results, while interactively adjusting test complexity to optimally challenge the cognitive capacity being measured. The system renders a number of useful measurements, based on proprietary manipulation and analysis of continuous data generated. Appropriate and meaningful cognitive scores are then tabulated, and displayed for analysis.
In particular embodiments, the invention tests for: physical reaction time; perceptual awareness thresholds; brain-speed, and; the speed, efficiency and capacity of elementary cognitive processes, including choice, discrimination and decision responses, memory-access and information-retrieval. The invention also quantifies the subject""s degree of focus or attention and working memory""s speed of accessing long term memory files believed to reside in both left and right brain hemispheres.
In addition, the complexity of the tests are adjusted on-line, based on individual test results, in order to optimize learning of desired improvements in awareness, attention and in speed and efficiency of brain and cognitive processes. The inventive system also compiles a historical comparison and analysis of the test scores, presents written comments, and provides a performance rating system all graphically displayed.